Vikings Message Board.Com

losperros wrote: Same here, Jim.

That was a beauty of a sack Robison had on Orton early in the game. No way Robison looked anything but quick on that one.

Agreed. It's too bad it was nullified. Barr really didn't even need to come in and hit Orton on that play.

Okay, forget the sacks for a minute (not hard to do with half a sack). He hasn't exactly been a tackling machine, either. 6 tackles and 7 assists in 7 games? He is only participating in 2 tackles per game?

I understand these numbers don't tell the whole, entire story, but I would expect a starting NFL DE to have higher production than that. I've seen him be a lot more productive when JA was getting double-teamed on the other side, now it's time for him to show he deserves the big contract and the starting position.

dead_poet wrote: Before his extension in 2013, Robison compiled 16.5 sacks, 81 tackles and seven batted passes. Add in his 2013 and that brings up his stats to 25 sacks, 77 tackles, 10 batted passes and a fumble recovery for a TD. He led all 4-3 defensive ends last season in hurries with 63! That's not bad production from a former fourth-rounder. His $4 million price tag really isn't that much and isn't a detriment to the team in any way. He's a high-motor guy that causes quite a bit of disruption. I expect they'll move on in the next couple of seasons but he's been a consistent, productive defensive end over the last few years in my eyes. Not a superstar by any means, but I think average to better-than-average LDE all things considered. YMMV

Great points and I agree.
Countless posts of draft Teddy draft Teddy, well Ricky did!

Even foeing him still have to read all of the "Ricky did this Ricky did that fire him get rid of the owners

soflavike wrote:Okay, forget the sacks for a minute (not hard to do with half a sack). He hasn't exactly been a tackling machine, either. 6 tackles and 7 assists in 7 games? He is only participating in 2 tackles per game?

I understand these numbers don't tell the whole, entire story, but I would expect a starting NFL DE to have higher production than that. I've seen him be a lot more productive when JA was getting double-teamed on the other side, now it's time for him to show he deserves the big contract and the starting position.

He got the "big contract" because he had already earned the starting position and even though you said "forget the sacks for a minute", you still seem to be defining production in statistical terms. If we're going to look at it that way, we should at least find more stats. How often are teams running to his side? How productive are they running to his side? How many QB pressures does he have this season?

I think the sack and tackle stats are far less important than whether a player is performing his role in the defensive scheme correctly. Is Robison anchoring the edge, maintaining his gap and funneling ball-carriers to the LBs? Is he supposed to be making a lot of tackles or is he supposed to be making it possible for the LBs to make a lot of tackles? Is he getting upfield to apply pressure on the QB, making sure the QB is contained in the pocket, etc? Containing the QB and pressuring him into the hands of another defender is still getting the job done, even if a player doesn't earn a sack on a play.

Here's something to think about when assessing Robison's performance:

The Vikings old Cover-2 scheme gave defensive linemen plenty of chances to rush upfield, but Zimmer's scheme mitigates those opportunities with more calls for linemen to engage blockers and collapse the pocket. Defensive ends typically don't accumulate big sack numbers in Zimmer's scheme -- in fact, only two defensive linemen (Geno Atkins and Michael Johnson, both in 2012) posted double-digit sack totals in a season when Zimmer was the defensive coordinator in Cincinnati. Getting the Vikings to grasp the scheme changes has been an ongoing process in Minnesota, and it appears Zimmer isn't fully satisfied with the results yet.

Mothman wrote: He got the "big contract" because he had already earned the starting position and even though you said "forget the sacks for a minute", you still seem to be defining production in statistical terms. If we're going to look at it that way, we should at least find more stats. How often are teams running to his side? How productive are they running to his side? How many QB pressures does he have this season?

I think the sack and tackle stats are far less important than whether a player is performing his role in the defensive scheme correctly. Is Robison anchoring the edge, maintaining his gap and funneling ball-carriers to the LBs? Is he supposed to be making a lot of tackles or is he supposed to be making it possible for the LBs to make a lot of tackles? Is he getting upfield to apply pressure on the QB, making sure the QB is contained in the pocket, etc? Containing the QB and pressuring him into the hands of another defender is still getting the job done, even if a player doesn't earn a sack on a play.

Here's something to think about when assessing Robison's performance:

Totally agree

So Griffen getting, what, 7 sacks, is some kind of miracle in Zimmer's systems? I don't buy it, you rush the QB hard if your a DE. Unless you are called on to stop the run. Then you either stuff the run or rush the QB. Robison isn't doing either very well. Griffen seems to have a handle on it. Even with the blitzes we have now, something should have trickled down to Robison.

And comparing this D to the last few years, isn't a good comparison to having a good D. Watch the last couple minutes of yesterdays game. That's a bad D getting beat by a team that isn't very good on offense. I can understand trying to find a silver lining in yesterdays game. Robison isn't it. The D, being slightly better, then previous years, really isn't it either. Nor is Teddy (who I personally thought would be an immediate improvement to the offense) a silver lining. We don't have much talent. It kind of has come back around to that.

Extending him when they did, to the deal they did, was a mistake and some of us said it at the time. He's a DE on the wrong side of thirty. And was never more then a solid player on a line with a lot of help around him.

Then there's the question if he fits in Zimmers defense. And if he would have got that extension had Zimmer been here...

This thread is really making me want to

PurpleKoolaid wrote:So Griffen getting, what, 7 sacks, is some kind of miracle in Zimmer's systems? I don't buy it, you rush the QB hard if your a DE. Unless you are called on to stop the run. Then you either stuff the run or rush the QB. Robison isn't doing either very well. Griffen seems to have a handle on it. Even with the blitzes we have now, something should have trickled down to Robison.

And comparing this D to the last few years, isn't a good comparison to having a good D. Watch the last couple minutes of yesterdays game. That's a bad D getting beat by a team that isn't very good on offense. I can understand trying to find a silver lining in yesterdays game. Robison isn't it. The D, being slightly better, then previous years, really isn't it either. Nor is Teddy (who I personally thought would be an immediate improvement to the offense) a silver lining. We don't have much talent. It kind of has come back around to that.

Robison has had 8-9 sacks for 3 STRAIGHT YEARS!!! It's called consistency. Just because he hasn't started off the season with 10 sacks doesn't make him a below average DE.

PurpleKoolaid wrote:So Griffen getting, what, 7 sacks, is some kind of miracle in Zimmer's systems? I don't buy it, you rush the QB hard if your a DE. Unless you are called on to stop the run. Then you either stuff the run or rush the QB. Robison isn't doing either very well. Griffen seems to have a handle on it. Even with the blitzes we have now, something should have trickled down to Robison.

And comparing this D to the last few years, isn't a good comparison to having a good D. Watch the last couple minutes of yesterdays game. That's a bad D getting beat by a team that isn't very good on offense. I can understand trying to find a silver lining in yesterdays game. Robison isn't it. The D, being slightly better, then previous years, really isn't it either. Nor is Teddy (who I personally thought would be an immediate improvement to the offense) a silver lining. We don't have much talent. It kind of has come back around to that.

The fact that you don't think we have talent is your "opinion" I guess and to this day I don't entirely agree with it at all, but for you to literally repeat "we have no talent" in every thread is getting pretty tiring. We understand how you feel about the team, Spielman and its' "talent level" but give it a rest will you. My god you're like a broken record.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: The fact that you don't think we have talent is your "opinion" I guess and to this day I don't entirely agree with it at all, but for you to literally repeat "we have no talent" in every thread is getting pretty tiring. We understand how you feel about the team, Spielman and its' "talent level" but give it a rest will you. My god you're like a broken record.

No, our record since the Wilf's and Rick have taken over, lead me to believe we have don't have much talent. You blind optimism over our GM's 'picks' is more tiring, trust me.

PurpleKoolaid wrote: No, our record since the Wilf's and Rick have taken over, lead me to believe we have don't have much talent. You blind optimism over our GM's 'picks' is more tiring, trust me.

According to who's standards?? You and Demi are pretty much the only two people on this board that have the same views regarding Spielman, the team, and the amount of negativity you bring is becoming over the top. If what I have discussed and the backing I have put behind my posts is tiring to you two.....trust me, I won't be losing any sleep over it.

Three bad years with a half #### there wild card joke of a season in between? We haven't been contenders for the division, and barely wild card, since Favre, and then a few years before that. Other than the Favre year, when did we have a chance for the division? A decade ago? And coming off a bad year, we're a bottom of the pack team this year!

Spielman's first few drafts were spotty at best. As far as free agency, he has garnered a good crop of draft picks, but the Vikings really have been unable to get a long-term game changer. It seems that until 2012, the moves were all short-term, and infused with a "gotta win now" desperation. That appears to have improved in the last three drafts, but it's still hard to tell at this point. So criticisms of Rick Spielman are not unfounded. What is arguable is how much authority he has wielded in the past compared to now (hence how culpable is he?), or if he just learned through trial and error and set back the franchise a few seasons in the process.

Mothman wrote: He got the "big contract" because he had already earned the starting position and even though you said "forget the sacks for a minute", you still seem to be defining production in statistical terms. If we're going to look at it that way, we should at least find more stats. How often are teams running to his side? How productive are they running to his side? How many QB pressures does he have this season?

I think the sack and tackle stats are far less important than whether a player is performing his role in the defensive scheme correctly. Is Robison anchoring the edge, maintaining his gap and funneling ball-carriers to the LBs? Is he supposed to be making a lot of tackles or is he supposed to be making it possible for the LBs to make a lot of tackles? Is he getting upfield to apply pressure on the QB, making sure the QB is contained in the pocket, etc? Containing the QB and pressuring him into the hands of another defender is still getting the job done, even if a player doesn't earn a sack on a play.

Here's something to think about when assessing Robison's performance:

I agree with all you say here, and I think Robison is a good DE, but I do think he's a bit miscast in Zimmer's D. He isn't quite powerful enough to consistently collapse the pocket, and tends to fall back on his quickness and run himself out of plays a little too often. I'm pretty sure Chicago would be better off with Robison than Allen at this point, and a team like Atlanta could use him, and I'm sure many other teams, but I don't think he has much longer with the Vikings. Its not a knock on him in my opinion. He's clearly working hard and he certainly makes a number of good plays. He is at least passable at his position for the time being.